Tag Archives: Nexus

Where (1) there was an insufficient nexus shown between the alleged drug trafficking operation and the residence searched and (2) to the extent that the search warrant affidavit contained any showing of a nexus, such information was stale, the evidence ...

Where the commonwealth appeals from a Superior Court order allowing the defendants’ motions to suppress evidence obtained pursuant to a search warrant, the order must be reversed because the affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant established the required nexus between the alleged drug activity and the premises to be searched.

Where a motion judge concluded that the affidavit in support of a search warrant for the defendant’s person failed to establish the requisite nexus, there was in fact probable cause to believe the evidence sought would be found on the defendant’s person.

Where a Superior Court judge ordered the suppress of evidence gathered from a search of a dwelling, the search warrant affidavit established probable cause that the defendants were operating a drug delivery service from the targeted location.

Where a motion to suppress evidence recovered pursuant to a search warrant was denied, the denial must be upheld because there was sufficient probable cause to establish a nexus between drug-dealing activities and the apartment searched.

Where a search warrant affidavit lacked sufficient detail to explain why the officers had reason to believe that drugs would be discovered in the defendant's residence, the affidavit failed to establish a sufficient nexus between the defendant's apartment and drug activity, and therefore the allowance of the defendant's motion to suppress the evidence was correct.

Where a Boston Municipal Court judge allowed the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence seized from his room pursuant to a search warrant, this was error, as the affidavit submitted in support of the search warrant application furnished probable cause to search the room.

Where a judge allowed a defendant’s motion to suppress, that ruling must be reversed because the information provided in the search warrant affidavit established a sufficient nexus to the defendant's apartment to support a finding of probable cause that contraband related to drug sales would be found in the location searched.

Where a judge denied a defendant’s motion to suppress, (1) the search warrant application established probable cause to believe that evidence of the defendant's drug dealing would be found in his apartment and (2) the motion judge did not err in finding that the basement was within the curtilage of the defendant's apartment.

Where the defendant’s residence was his point of departure for two controlled buys, and point of return for three buys, the judge erred by not finding a sufficient nexus between the defendant's drug dealing activities and the residence.